Freethought & Rationalism Archive

renassault · 03-03-2008, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

How come every time there is proof of the Gospels written by an outside source, atheists immediately pick it apart?

The holes in the "proof" are too large to ignore for many.

Carrier has already dealt with this subject:

Jacoby and Müller on "Thallus"

What's funny is how Jacoby assumes that Thallus and Phlegon are talking about the solar eclipse of November 24, 29 AD, clearly ignoring the passage by Africanus where he states that Phlegon reports a new moon during the eclipse, which would make the moon diametrically opposed to where a new moon which makes a solar eclipse would have to be; exactly the time of Easter.

Quote:

Intersting. If there was a darkness that covered the whole Earth in AD 32, would any other historians be expected to comment on it?

ARE there any other historians that mention the world-wide darkness? No matter what their ideology...?

It wasn't worldwide.

Dogfish · 03-03-2008, 04:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gullwind

Why? The bible is full of stories about people who knew from first-hand experience that God existed, yet that knowledge didn't stop them from disobeying. Adam and Eve, for starters.

How would God revealing himself "force" anyone to obey him?

So if you won't obey God, why should he show up and appear to you?

Just so you can go "Oh Hey God! Nope sorry, still not worshiping though. Nice effort though buddy."

Because he loves us?

Doug Shaver · 03-03-2008, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

So if you won't obey God, why should he show up and appear to you?

You are assuming I would not obey him if I knew he was real. I'd like to see you try to justify that assumption.

Steven Carr · 03-03-2008, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassault

What's funny is how Jacoby assumes that Thallus and Phlegon are talking about the solar eclipse of November 24, 29 AD, clearly ignoring the passage by Africanus where he states that Phlegon reports a new moon during the eclipse, which would make the moon diametrically opposed to where a new moon which makes a solar eclipse would have to be; exactly the time of Easter.

There is no new moon at Easter.

Steven Carr · 03-03-2008, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by renassault

It wasn't worldwide.

Really? What word does the author Matthew use for world?

JoeWallack · 03-04-2008, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

Miraculous darkness when Christ died for our sins

* A pagan historian by the name of Thallus, who lived shortly after the resurrection of Christ. In about A.D. 52 he wrote concerning a miraculous darkness that covered the earth at the Passover of A.D. 32 and attempted to explain it as an eclipse of the sun. Julius Africanus, a Christian teacher in North Africa in A.D. 215, wrote concerning this historian's assertions, "Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away this darkness as an eclipse of the sun - unreasonably as it seems to me." Julius contends, and modern astronomers confirm, that the Paschal full moon in which the Passover occurred (the Passover in which Christ was crucified) could not have been eclipsed. Thus, no known natural explanation can be presented to explain the darkness referred to in the Bible as occurring during Christ's crucifixion.

PHLEGON, A FIRST CENTURY HISTORIAN

[As quoted by Philopon]:

"And about this darkness...Phlegon recalls it in the Olympiads (the title of his history)." He says that "Phlegon mentioned the eclipse which took place during the crucifixion of the Lord Christ, and no other (eclipse), it is clear that he did not know from his sources about any (similar) eclipse in previous times...and this is shown by the historical account itself of Tiberius Caesar."

http://bibleprobe.com/300great.htm

How come every time there is proof of the Gospels written by an outside source, atheists immediately pick it apart?

What would constitute as evidence for you guys?

JW:
You're all window dressed up for the Promise but have no Date. Regarding a/the "Miraculous darkness", when exactly do you claim this was? I tell you the truth though, if Thallus really wrote:

Quote:

a miraculous darkness that covered the earth at the Passover of A.D. 32

I freely confess that would be a miracle.

Your Patristic predecessors, using all the information you possess and than some, could never deicide even on the supposed year of Jesus' death with 29 CE and 32 CE being the odds on favorites but 2,000 years later still waiting for Jesus to win, place or even show.

Joseph

PALMISTRY, n.
The 947th method (according to Mimbleshaw's classification) of obtaining money by false pretences. It consists in "reading character" in the wrinkles made by closing the hand. The pretence is not altogether false; character can really be read very accurately in this way, for the wrinkles in every hand submitted plainly spell the word "dupe." The imposture consists in not reading it aloud.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Biff the unclean · 03-04-2008, 11:18 AM

Passover is ALWAYS on the full moon.
A solar eclipse can ONLY happen on the new moon.

Nero's Boot · 03-04-2008, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dogfish

Quote:

Originally Posted by Half-Life

So if you won't obey God, why should he show up and appear to you?

Just so you can go "Oh Hey God! Nope sorry, still not worshiping though. Nice effort though buddy."

Because he loves us?

...except for, you know, the whole "Love me obsessively and constantly tell me how great I am, or I'll torture you forever!" routine.

--except for that NB

reniaa · 03-04-2008, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donn10

If something unusual happened in the heavens I would expect to see it referenced in the writings and folklore of many different cultures.

This is a good point but would be irrelevant, as you can see this with the flood that has been told in many different societies and beliefs but still it is discredited, what you get on that is the equivalent to apologectic sources but in skeptics viewpoint as to why the flood is so referenced. so even if many sources talk on same unexpected days of darkness it would be treated much as the flood has been.

A/ be said to come from same original source basically copying even if people a thousands of miles apart and unrelated.

B/ said to be an 'ordinary' event that all would explain but sound similar even if that is unlikely but not really taking the fact that the same time, elements, unlikely coincidences and so forth. i,e in this case an eclipse, flood etc

c/ basically say there's no physical proof so it didn't happen anyway whatever that historian a thousand years ago says.

i'm getting used to the way skepticism works now when applied to history and events :s I wonder if skeptics realise they are in danger of falling into similar patterns of how to deal with things to make them unthreatening to their beliefs?

Minimalist · 03-04-2008, 03:29 PM

You are forgetting one key element, Reniaa.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF A SINGLE WORLD WIDE FLOOD.

Such an event would leave unmistakable traces and, alas, we have none. Repeated sightings of unexplained darkness, repeated in many cultures, would be interesting but short of a massive meteor strike or volcanic explosion (both of which would leave evidence, also) it is hard to see how something like that could be shown physically.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-04-2008, 11:18 AM	#47
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	Passover is ALWAYS on the full moon. A solar eclipse can ONLY happen on the new moon.

03-04-2008, 03:29 PM	#50
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	You are forgetting one key element, Reniaa. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF A SINGLE WORLD WIDE FLOOD. Such an event would leave unmistakable traces and, alas, we have none. Repeated sightings of unexplained darkness, repeated in many cultures, would be interesting but short of a massive meteor strike or volcanic explosion (both of which would leave evidence, also) it is hard to see how something like that could be shown physically.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.